The Red Line - The role of the Church within the European and International framework
by Lucrezia Nicosia, 6 minutes
This is a special project done in collaboration with the Maastricht Diplomat of United Nations Student Association (UNSA). It consists of a series of four articles and four podcasts on the role of the Catholic Church within the International and European legal, social and political framework. The articles will be released on the blue&yellow blog of ECA and the Maastricht Diplomat of UNSA will provide a platform for the podcasts on Spotify.
The people that helped in the realization of this project are: Lucrezia Nicosia and Eliza Wójcik from the blue&yellow blog of ECA, Victoria Alexander, Rhiannon Read from the Maastricht Diplomat of UNSA.
By way of this project, our aim is to contribute to a more informed and just debate on the conflict between religion and secular authority. The following is the second article of the series (you can find the first article here).
If you read the previous article on the historical influence of the Church in Europe (“European legal history: the unbreakable bond between Church and State”), you know that the Holy See and the State of Vatican City are two different entities, though closely related to each other. As I explained, after the loss of the Pontifical States, the Holy See was left with no direct sovereignty over a territory. Territorial sovereignty was later regained by the 1929 Lateran Treaty with the creation of the State of Vatican City. But let’s explain this!
The Lateran Pact was signed on the 11th of February of 1929 by Benito Mussolini on behalf of the Italian government and by cardinal secretary of state Pietro Gasparri on behalf of the papacy. It consisted of three main documents:
A financial agreement in which Italy endured a reimbursement to the Church for the loss of the Pontifical States;
A concordat which determined the relations between the Church and the State; and
A political treaty made to settle the so-called “Roman Question”. The latter refers to the political-religious dispute between the Church and the Kingdom of Italy which started with the unification of Italy in 1861 and thus, with the loss of the Pontifical States by the Holy See. The conflict related to the role of the city of Rome, which was the seat of the Pope's temporal power but, at the same time, the capital of the Kingdom of Italy.
The resolution of the “Roman Question” was of particular importance for the Church, especially in the international sphere. Indeed, since medieval times the Holy See had always entered into international relations and the question of its legal status as a non-State religious organization rarely arose. Nevertheless, with the loss of its territorial basis, its legal status in the international framework became more controversial.
Therefore, by way of the Lateran Treaty, the Kingdom of Italy recognized, inter alia, Vatican City as an independent state under the sovereignty of the Holy See. This was done to guarantee indisputable and visible independence and sovereignty of the Holy See and to ensure a wider international recognition of the entity.
The Lateran Treaty was then recognized in 1948 by the Constitution of the Italian Republic, in which it is stated that relations between the State and the Catholic Church "are regulated by the Lateran Treaty”. Nevertheless, some changes to the Pact were made in 1984 including, inter alia, the end of the Catholic religion as the sole religion of Italy and the end of the Church's position as the sole state-supported religion. This way, it seems that Italy finally cut the historical bond with the spiritual authority of the Church. But are we sure that the ratification of a document can lead that easily to the apostasy of a nation? This matter will be discussed in depth in another article; now the focus is on the role of the Holy See and Vatican City within the European and International framework.
A distinction existed and will always exist between the Holy See and Vatican City. As it has been already mentioned in the previous article, the Holy See is based on spiritual sovereignty, while Vatican City is grounded on territorial sovereignty. Whilst being both headed by the Supreme Pontiff or the Pope, and being seen as a singular union for most purposes, in the international sphere they are considered as two entities enjoying different international legal status.
Vatican City seems to satisfy the criteria of statehood outlined in the 1933 Montevideo Convention on the Rights and Duties of States. Statehood is determined by four criteria:
A permanent population;
A defined territory,
A settled government, and
The ability to enter into relations with other states, including the ability to fulfil international treaty obligations.
The fulfilment of these conditions determines the role of an entity within the legal framework: indeed, despite new changes and exceptions, states remain the main players in the international community. It is for this reason that many argue that the international status of the Holy See is not legitimized since it does not comply with the requirements of statehood.
Nevertheless, the Montevideo Convention represents only a formal theory of statehood. Therefore, whether the international community decides to recognize an entity as a state or not, is far more relevant in practice. The Holy See entertains multiple relations with the international community, and this explains why its presence within the worldwide legal framework is not surprising.
But how can the Holy See be identified? As we have seen, the Holy See cannot be considered as a State, but it is better described as a sui generis non-State actor, whose authority is not based on territorial sovereignty, but rather on spiritual sovereignty.
Vatican City and the Holy See cover different fields in the international framework: while the former is more interested in agreements that would favour the practical interests of the state, the latter is more involved in human rights and religious matters. This division explains the involvement of the Holy See in different human rights organizations, such as the United Nations (UN) and the Council of Europe (CoE).
As for what concerns the UN, the Holy See is granted Permanent Observer Status and, even though it is not eligible for full membership in the General Assembly, it has substantial power in the work of the organization. The Holy See influenced the decisions and reccomendations of the UN by incorporating its religious values; one example is its opposition to the adoption of a resolution on sexual orientation and gender identity proposed by the European Union in the General Assembly.
Similarly, regarding its role within the Council of Europe, the Holy See is given Observer Status; however, full membership in the CoE is precluded by the Holy See's lack of democracy and human rights guarantees.
To review, this article analyzed how Vatican City came into existence outlining the importance of the Lateran Treaty. It also explained the difference between the Holy See and Vatican City and their status within the international legal framework.
This is a special project done in collaboration with the Maastricht Diplomat of United Nations Student Association (UNSA). If you enjoyed this article, please check out the podcast on the Maastricht Diplomat on Spotify where I, Lucrezia Nicosia, and Victoria Alexander will have an interesting discussion on this topic! Also, remember to stay tuned for the other articles of the project which will be published soon!
The people that helped in the realization of this project are: Lucrezia Nicosia and Eliza Wójcik from the blue&yellow blog of ECA, Victoria Alexander, Rhiannon Read and Brendan Hogan from the Maastricht Diplomat of UNSA.
